Challenges & Opportunities of Motorcycle Safety: Malaysia experience

Motorcycle Safety Forum

Brasil, 2013

1

Prepared by: Prof. Wong Shaw Voon Director General Malaysian Institute of Road Safety Research

• Motorcycle classifications and regulations

• Motorcycle regulations, traffic

• Motorcycle ridership

• Road environment and motorcycle lane

• Crash statistics & pattern

• Case study 1: Young motorcyclists

• Case study 2 : Underage motorcyclists and pillion

• Helmet wearing observations

• Educating road users

• Understanding riders behaviors

• Conspicuity

2

Presentation Contents

.....Contents • Motorcyclists protection

• Crash test simulation

• Other researches

• Other initiatives

3

Motorcycle Classification

• Majority, 99% <250 cc engine

• >250 cc engine low representation, primarily for leisure riding

• >95% of <150 cc dominates the category, for commuting to work, college

• No moped category

4

Motorcycle regulations

• Ownership registration and road-tax fee

• Driver license requirements

• License eligibility starts at 16 years

• Motorcycle occupancy 2

• No age limit for pillion passengers

• Traffic rules apply, same as other modes

5

Utilization Growth

6

Years

Vo

lum

e

Registered Motorcycles by Years

[RTD Statistics, 2013]

Motorcycles in traffic

• In common traffic

• Mix with other modes

• Multi-positions

• Splitting moves

• Motorcycle lanes

• Exclusive

• Shared (non-exclusive)

7

8

Exclusive MC lane (physical barrier , raised median)

Non-exclusive MC lane (shared, marking segregation)

9

Mixed with other modes, in expressways, intercity, interstate roads

Relative Risk to Users of Various Means Transport

• The KSI rate for car occupants were about 7–9 times higher and for pedestrians 3–54 times higher as compared to those of bus and coach occupants (ECBOS, 2001)

• Killed and seriously injured (KSI) rate per 100 million

Motorcycle ridership Ridership and travel pattern Licensing

11

Ridership and travel pattern

• Distributed age groups ridership

• Commuting to work, occupational and perform daily chores

• Factors influencing ridership

• Economy – fuel, parking, low ownership & maintenance

• Traffic situations

• Door-to-door service

12

Motorcycle Licensing System

LDL

• Minimum age to obtain LDL for motorcycle is 16 years old.

• Restrict to single rider only, pillion not allowed.

• Renewable every 3 or 6 months to maximum of 2 years.

• Shall display the “L” plate.

PDL

• Probation license

• Subject to KEJARA demerit point system.

• PDL will be revoked if demerit points accumulated to 10.

• Shall display the “P” plate.

Road environment and motorcycle lane • Effectiveness of lane

• Existing practice

• Design guidelines

14

Types of Motorcycle Lane

Type Example Location

Exclusive

• Federal Route No 2 connecting Shah Alam to Klang,

• KESAS highway and • Persiaran Utara dan

Persiaran Timur, Putrajaya

Non – Exclusive : Inclusive

• Seksyen No 115-125 Federal Route No 5, Batu Pahat Johor

• Sekyen No 0 –5.5, Federal Route No 58, Teluk Intan, Perak

15

Type of Motorcycle Lane

Type Example Location

Non – Exclusive : Paved Shoulder

All roads with existing paved shoulder

16

Effectiveness of MC Lane

• 1970s, the exclusive MC lanes were built as part of the Federal Route 2 but no study was conducted.

• 1994, the MC Lane was extended and a study showed a reduction of 39% in motorcycle crashes.

• The road accident statistics have consistently indicated that most of the fatal motorcycle accidents involved another motor vehicles (70% in 2011). If the motorcycles are segregated from the other motor vehicles, we would be able to isolate the said risk in an effective way.

17

Motorcycle Lane Design Guideline • The design of the earlier Malaysian Motorcycle lanes

was based the design criteria for bicycle, with much lower cruising speed.

• The earlier design was based on “A Guide on Geometric Design of Roads 8/16” and “ A Guide to the Design of Cycle Track 10/86”, both published by the Public Works Department, Malaysia (PWD, 1986).

• Recently, in the year 2011, the Road Engineering Association Malaysia (REAM) has published a guideline related to motorcycle lane design called “Guideline for Motorcycle Facilities”.

18

Guideline for Motorcycle Facilities (REAM, 2011)

• The guideline cover the following: • Motorcycle Warrants

• Exclusive MC Lane

• Non-Exclusive MC Lane

• Treatment of Paved Shoulder at Point of Conflict

• Motorcycle Shelter

• Street Lighting

• Traffic Barrier

• Motorcycle Lane Facilities at Work Site

19

Motorcycle Safety on Barrier

20

Injury at MC lane

Crashes with roadside objects along motorcycle lanes in Malaysia • Exclusive motorcycle lanes were effective to reduce motorcyclist fatalities on roads

• Nevertheless, frequent motorcycle crashes still occur on exclusive motorcycle lanes.

• Roadside objects are one of the main contributing factors to motorcyclist fatalities.

• As a standard practice, standard guardrails erected along highways and roads

• Guardrails identified as the most struck object, representing 32.7% of all roadside object-related motorcycle crashes along MC lane, and narrow surface objects contribute to higher fatality ratethan guardrails.

• Guardrails contributed 23.5% of all fatal roadside object-related crashes

• 1.7 times more likely to cause serious injury to motorcyclists than non-object-related motorcycle crashes.

• These findings support that guardrails are suitable to be used as a protection agent for the motorcyclists using the exclusive motorcycle lanes. However, further research and enhancements on the guardrail design system and material type are needed to have safer exclusive motorcycle lanes.

[S.H. Tung et al., 2007]

Prediction Models for Motorcycle Crashes at Signalized Intersections

• Addressed intersection crashes involving motorcycles.

• Provided models for predicting motorcycle crashes at signalized intersections

• Traffic entering the intersection, approach speed, lane width, number of lanes, shoulder width, and land use at the approach of the intersection were found to be significant in describing motorcycle crashes.

• Findings allowed road engineers to draw up appropriate intersection treatment criteria specifically designed for motorcycle lane facilities

[S. Harnen et al, 2004] 22

Crash statistics & pattern

23

South East Asia – Road Safety Status

Country Population

Total registere

d vehicles % Car

% Motorcyc

le % Heavy

Truck % Buses % Other

Veh Total

fatalities

% Motorcyclist death

Brunei 398920 349279 46

Cambodia 14138255 1652534 15% 83% 2% 0% 0% 1816 67%

Indonesia 23987094

4 7269295

1 11% 83% 5% 2% 0% 31324 36%

Laos 6200894 1008788 17% 81% 0% 3% 0% 790 74%

Malaysia 28401017 2018856

5 45% 47% 5% 0% 3% 6872 59%

Myanmar 47963010 2326639 12% 82% 3% 1% 3% 2464 23%

Philipines 93260800 6634855 42% 52% 5% 1% 0% 6941 Singapore 5086418 945829 193 46%

Thailand 69122232 2848482

9 35% 61% 3% 0% 1% 13766 74%

Vietnam 87848460 3316641

1 2% 95% 2% 0% 0% 11029 24

Malaysia Road Fatalities Record

25

[Rohayu S., et al., 2012]

Fatalities by Transport Mode

26 [Abdul Manan and Várhelyi, 2012]

Road Fatalities Prediction

27

[ Rohayu S., et al., 2012]

2015 - 8,760

2020-10,716

If business remains as usual !!!

Case study 1: Young motorcyclists

28

[Ilhamah O., et al., 2013]

Young motorcyclist fatality in Malaysia

54% of the 6877 deaths from traffic injuries were motorcycle riders in 2011 and of these motorcyclist deaths, 37% were young riders aged between 16 to 25 years old.

The trend of fatalities among motorcycle riders aged between 16 to 25 years as a

proportion of all rider fatalities remain the highest in comparison with other age distribution throughout the year.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Fata

lity

(%)

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Crash locations

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

16 17 18 19 20 21

Fata

lity

(%)

Age of motorcycle rider

City

Urban

Built-up area

Rural

[Ilhamah O., et al., 2013]

Case study: License Type (age group 16-21)

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

16 17 18 19 20 21

83.9

60.4

48.6

39.4 36.5

32.1

4.5 6.8 6.9 6.0 5.2

3.6

11.6

32.8

44.5

54.4

58.3

64.1

Fata

lity

(%)

Age of motorcycle rider

Unlicensed

L License

P or Full License

International License

Military License

[Ilhamah O., et al., 2013]

Helmet Wearing Compliancy (age 16-21)

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

16 17 18 19 20 21

57.0

68.1

72.3

78.3 79.0

83.2

2.7 3.2 5.2 4.5 4.5 3.3

40.2

28.7

22.5

17.2 16.6 13.5

Fata

lity

(%)

Age of motorcycle rider

Wore and strapped

Wore but not strapped

Not wearing

[Ilhamah O., et al., 2013]

Case Study 2: Underage Motorcyclists & Pillion

33

[Noorfaradila P. et al., 2011]

Overloading Issues • Study focused on child pillion only.

• 29% riders carried more than one child pillion riders

• Female riders were 1.6 times more likely to carry more than one pillion rider (95%CI 1.1-2.2)

• 19% child pillion rider sat in between the riders and the most rear pillion.

• Multiple pillion riders could affect the centre of gravity (CG) and handling of motorcycle. Sudden changes on CG might affect the manuevering process.

Children Pillion • Riders tend to allocate youngest child in front while

riding. • increases the risk of the child being squeezed during

emergency braking or road crash

• 7.2% child pillion riders occupying the front “seat”.

• 35% child pillion did not occupy footpeg • Out-of-reach OR

• In multi-pillion cases, footpeg occupied by other pillion

Mode of Commuting to School

MODE OF TRAVELLING

PENINSULAR SABAH & SARAWAK 13 years

(%) 14 years

(%) 13 years

(%) 14 years

(%)

Car/4wd 26.9 22.7 42.1 41.7

Walk 17.8 14.9 8.4 13.8

Motorcycle Pillion 15.1 16.0 4.4 4.7

School Bus/Van (yellow) 10.0 10.6 24.5 24.0

Bicycle 7.3 8.7 1.5 2.0

Army Truck/Van/MPV 6.8 7.1 8.8 6.3

Public Bus 6.2 8.4 7.3 6.3

Motorcycle riders 5.7 7.8 2.9 1.2

LRT/Monorel 4.1 3.9 0.0 0.0

[Noorfaradila P. et al., 2011]

Motorcycle Riding Experience (Underage)

38

More than 40% students have ridden motorcycles on the road for any purpose.

[Noorfaradila P. et al., 2011]

Helmet wearing – observational study

39

Helmet-wearing, Festive Season (Hari Raya 2012)

Semenyih (Urban) Sekinchan (Rural)

Before

OPS During OPS

OR

(95%

Cl)

Before

OPS During OPS OR (95% Cl)

Wear

helmet

4074

(96.0)

5063 (96.6) 0.842

(0.680,

1.043)

2519

(85.8)

2430 (86.9)

0.910

(0.782, 1.058) Not wear

helmet

171

(4.0)

179 (3.4) 417

(14.2)

366 (13.1)

Standard

helmet

3665

(90.0)

4388 (86.7)

1.378*

(1.210,

1.571)

1078

(42.8)

920 (37.9)

1.228*

(1.096, 1.376) Non-

standard

helmet

409

(10.0)

675 (13.3) 1441

(57.2)

1510 (62.1)

Helmet Wearing Festive Season (CNY 2013)

Rawang (Urban) Sekinchan (Rural)

Before

OPS During OPS

OR

(95%

Cl)

Before

OPS During OPS OR (95% Cl)

Wear

helmet

2841

(98.6)

2587 (98.7) 0.9335

(0.5891,

1.4791)

1466

(86.5)

1241 (78.9)

1.7075* (1.4196

, 2.0538) Not wear

helmet

40 (1.4) 34 (1.3) 229

(13.5)

331 (21.1)

Standard

helmet

2516

(88.6)

2365 (91.4)

0.7267*

(0.6.72 ,

0.8697)

604

(41.2)

638 (51.4)

0.6615* (0.5680

, 0.7703) Non-

standard

helmet

325

(11.4)

222 (8.6) 863

(58.8)

603 (48.6)

Educating road users

• RSE in schools

• Awareness program

• Community-based program

42

Demographics relationship between rider and pillion and child pillion for safety helmet use compliance

43 Safety Helmet Use Rate and Child Pillion Rider’s Characteristic in Selangor, 2013

RSE in Secondary School

• 2012, RSE module which aims to provide knowledge and subsequent behavior modification, began to be taught among secondary school students (13 years old and beyond).

• By 2014, RSE reached 15 years-old (Form 3)

• Only modules for Form 2 and 3 have specific topics related to motorcycle safety.

FORM 2 (14 years old)

Unit 3 : Safety Equipment: Seat Belts & Helmets

Unit 4 : Consequences of driving or riding without a license

Helmet & wearing

FORM 3 (15 years old)

Unit 1: Risky Behavior

Unit 3 : Owning a license is a privilege

Community-based Program, CBP • Interventions explored by MIROS to educate the community and

eventually improve the state of road safety in Malaysia.

• Provides an opportunity for the community to tailor and execute the social marketing, education, and enforcement programmes that benefits their own members.

• MIROS roles - consultation and evaluation activities (essential supports from other stakeholders such as the local governments, police, non-governmental organisations and relevant government agencies).

• First CBP - district of Kuang in 2007, rural community nvolved in educating their members on proper helmet wearing.

• CBP programme was carried out in Precinct 8, Putrajaya in 2011, involving urban population in the Malaysia’s administrative capital.

• Result proved that Precinct 8 recorded a significant improvement in the % of proper helmet and seat belt wearings when compared to a control site Precinct 16.

• Manual on CBP implementation developed to enable other communities to replicate the programme.

54

Understanding riders behaviors – MIROS study

• Hazard perception and behaviors

• Instrumented motorcycle

• Lighting and conspicuity

55

STUDY 1: Hazard Perception & Response Study (old curriculum)

Samples: 65 males and 39 females novice motorcyclists who just completed the motorcycle licensing and training program

[Ibrahim, M. K. A., et l., 2012]

Hazard Perception & Response Study Summary of findings

• Age and gender are significant factors in predicting accident risk of novice motorcyclists at junctions.

• Female and older motorcyclists were more at-risk on both performances measured

• no significant effects of the crossing vehicles were observed on riding performances.

• Hazard perception skills of novice motorcyclists in our sample were not entirely improved during the training

• Stricter exit test and more riding restrictions are needed to address the risk factor of motorcyclists

[Ibrahim, M. K. A., et l., 2012]

STUDY 2: Gap Acceptance & Riding Behaviours of Motorcyclists at Unsignalised Junctions

Table 2 Analysis of variance table

*

Significant at the 0.05 level

Variables d.f. F-ratio

GAP GAP-

reject

Speed SIG

Experience (E) 1 4.050 5.886* 0.503 0.043

Crash

Involvement

1 2.002 2.811 0.002 1.147

Presence of

right turn lane

(PL)

1 1.008 0.319 4.899* 5.798*

E x PL 1 0.165 2.267 0.214 2.425

*

Samples: Twenty (20) experienced motorcyclists with a mean age of 27 years and average riding experience of 10 years

[Ibrahim, M. K. A., et l., 2011]

STUDY 2: Gap Acceptance & Riding Behaviours of Motorcyclists at Unsignalised Junctions

Summary of findings •• Possibility of collecting gap acceptance data Possibility of collecting gap acceptance data of motorcyclists in

the field with the use of instrumented motorcycle

• Results indicated the differences in the size of gaps differences in the size of gaps accepted and rejected by motorcyclists at junctions with a right turn lane (compared to junctions without a turning lane)

•• Changes in riding performances Changes in riding performances were also observed in terms of turn signal use and choice of speed when the availability of the right turn lane was considered

• Study identified the effects of experience the effects of experience on the riding performances of motorcyclists at junctions

• The results are beneficial in developing a better understanding of the motorcyclists and road design factors that can contribute to reduction in risk of accidents - paving the way to more effective design solutions [Ibrahim, M. K. A., et l., 2011]

Instrumented Motorcycle v.1

Instrumented Motorcycle v.2

Conspicuity Recent MIROS work

62

Prevalence study of motorcycle lightings and conspicuity • Prevalence study on motorcycle lights functionality which

include day running light (DRL), rear position light (PL) and brake light (BL)

• Prevalence study on availability and possibility of adding LED type secondary brake light including its BCR

• Prevalence study of motorcycle and motorcyclists clothing dominant colour

• Study of availability of retro-reflective strip on motorcycle helmets

[Mohd Syazwan S., et al., 2013]

Results

• DRL malfunction 16.99%

• PL malfuction low, 26.2%

• Brake light malfuction low, 16%

• 3rd light brake avaibility, 4%

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No

Day running light (DRL)

Rear Position Light (PL)

combine (DRL+PL)

Brake Light 3rd brake light

83.01

16.99

73.76

26.24

78.03

21.97

83.67

16.33

4.07

95.93

DRL, PL, BL and 3rd light brake survey result

TOTAL (%)

[Mohd Syazwan S., et al., 2013]

Motorcyclists Clothing

• Dominant clothing is dark color with 44%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Dark Moderate Bright

motorcyclists clothing dominant color

44.04

31.49

24.47

TOTAL (%)

[Mohd Syazwan S., et al., 2013]

Helmet Reflector & Motorcycle Colour

• Reflective sticker availability very low, 3.75%

• Dark-colour motorcycle, 41%

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Yes No Dark Moderate Bright

Helmet reflector Motorcycle color

3.75

96.25

41.53

36.61

21.85

Helmet reflector Yes

Helmet reflector No

Motorcycle color Dark

Motorcycle color Moderate

Motorcycle color Bright

[Mohd Syazwan S., et al., 2013]

Motorcyclists Protection in MVA

67

Riders protection

• Accident and injury characteristics

• PPE and clothing

• Helmet effectiveness

• Helmet regulations and standards

• Compliance and wear rate

68

Accident characteristics of injured motorcyclists

[TY Pang et al., 2000]

• To identify motorcyclists characteristics who are higher fatality risk, 412 cases • Predominantly young, novice riders , 3-year licensure, male • Fatal outcome associated with

• larger engine size • crash opponent (heavy vehicle) • head-on configuration • non-junction road section

• Non-fatal outcome associated with • small engine capacity • crash opponent another motorcycle or passenger car • at road junction • side or rear collisions

Cervical Injuries • To correlate the motorcycle crash mode to the cervical injury sustained

by motorcyclists in real-world scenes.

• High count was noted for injuries to the lower cervical vertebrae, especially at vertebrae C5, intervertebral C5-C6, and vertebrae C6.

• Upper cervical spine was observed to have a high frequency of injury at C2, especially the odontoid process.

• Crash mode is significant in determining the cervical injury mechanism

• Neck flexion and extension movements are the most frequent neck injury mechanisms, especially in frontal and rear end impacted motorcycles.

• Burst fractures were commonly observed in frontal impacts.

• Uncinate process fractures, a result of neck lateral flexion in side impact and skidding motorcyclists crashes.

[S S Ooi et al., 2005]

Clothing

• Hospital-based study, 300 cases

• Common clothing worn at time of crashes

• short sleeve shirts, 63%

• sandals/slippers, 40.8%.

• helmet wearing rate among motorcyclists involved in road crashes, 92.7%,

• frequency of motorcyclists involved in crashes

o 1st timers, 48.5%

omore than once, 42.5%

71

[Azhar H., et al., 2011]

Helmet Effectiveness

• Non-helmeted motorcyclists

• >4 times as likely to have head injuries, 10 times as likely to have brain injuries

• Comparing with full-face, wearing half helmets were >2 times as likely to have head injuries.

• Compared with firmly fastened helmets, those with loosely fastened helmets increased their risk of head injury and were more than twice as likely to have brain injuries.

[Wu YY et al., 2011]

Helmet Effectiveness

• Helmeted trauma patients had lower odds of death when compared with nonhelmeted: adjusted odds ratio of 0.84 (95% CI: 0.76–0.93). N 75,644 helmeted patients had better Glasgow Coma Scale scores [2009,Croce et al.]

• Retrospective review of motorcycle crashes in the trauma registry at a Level I trauma center from 1996 to 2000. The risk of death was 16% lower in helmeted riders as compared with nonhelmeted riders [2002,Brandt et al]

Helmet Effectiveness

• Head injuries occurred in 4.7% of injured riders without a helmet compared with 1.9% of helmeted riders [Lin et al, 2001]

• Nonhelmeted riders were 2.5 times more likely to be killed and 3.5 times more likely to sustain a serious brain injury [Ouellet and Kasantikul, 2006]

• 32.8% increase in head injured-related mortality and a 42.2% increase in head injury-related hospitalizations per 10,000 motorcycle registrations after repeal of helmet law [Mertz and Weiss, 2008]

Helmet regulations

• Gazetted and enforced since 1970’s • Incorporated in Motorcycle Safety section, Road Transport Act, ACT 333 • Latest amendment 2012 • Inclusion of UN Regulation, R22

• Make reference to Helmet Standard, MS1

Helmet Standards • Helmet standards

• Malaysia Standard, MS1:2011 Helmet & visor specifications

• UN Regulations, R22

• Both covers design and performance tests, e.g. Impact performance, penetration resistance (excluded in R22), retention system integrity

• Standard-compliant helmets

• Proper certification by independent body

• Helmet and visor performance tests

• Traceable approval ID

• Non-standard helmets

• Not traceable to any standards, performance in doubt

• Not meeting head protection minimum coverage profile

• Intended for recreational use, however available in motorcycle shops

Helmet Impact Test

78

Penetration Test

79

Standard-compliant helmets

Approval sticker

Approval sticker, behind comfort liner

Standard-compliant children helmets

Approval sticker

Approval sticker, behind comfort liner

Non-standard helmets

Warning label, not for motorcycle use Unknown label

Non-standard helmet

Leather outer shell

Non-standard helmet

Unknown standard

Warning label, not for motorcycle useuse

Non-standard children helmet

Games or toy helmet

Observation - Cracked helmet in use

Impact foam exposed

Awareness Posters

87

Crash test simulation

• Full scale test

• Lab-based test

• Virtual testing

88

Motorcycle crash test 1

• 30 km/h, motorcycle side impacted car

• Rider’s head hit side windows

• Body (abdomen &hip) trapped on handlebar

• Helmet ejected (was not buckled)

• Severe damaged to front suspension and front wheel of motorcycle

90

91

Motorcycle crash test with and without on-board airbag

Test details • Exploratory test •100 cc motorcycle • Side collisions into car • 45km/h impact • Instrumented dummy

(MATD) • With and without airbag

93

Without experimental airbag

94

95

With experimental airbag

96

Findings

• Without experimental airbag • Low HIC, but high chest deflection values (contact with side window lower frame) • Increase injury risk to car occupants

• With airbag • High HIC, >1000 and severe neck/cervical loading • Airbag limit rider pivotal movement but caused

head+helmet to hit stiff roofrail

• Airbag position, trigger time needs further research • Other injuries such as abdomen and lower extremities

97

Other researches and works in Malaysia

98

Side underrun device for Heavy Vehicle (Trucks)

• Motorcycle side collision with heavy vehicle contributed approximately >200 fatalities annually.

• Lack of side under-run protection is one of the factors contributed to injury severity.

• Currently, Malaysia adopted front and rear underrun protection device from UN Regulation 58 and 93.

Consequences

100

Comprehensive Parametric Studies on Impact Behaviour of Front Wheel

Various empirical models for predicting the impact response of the wheel

Front Wheel Full Deformable Impact Simulation Model

103

104

105

Front Fork Static and Impact Tests – characterize energy absorption

Front Fork Full Deformable Simulation Model

Laboratory-based Full Crash Test Guardrail Crash Test

Laboratory-based Full Crash Test Moving Rigid Barrier Crash

Motorcycle Full Crash Simulation (on-going project)

Motorcycle Full Crash Simulation (on-going project)

Other initiatives Regulatory control

Aftersales Market

• Under National Automotive Policy review which was announced on 28 October 2009, government has set the banning of substandard and used automotive component importation, in stages beginning from June 2011. • Minister of International Trade and Industry, Malaysia has decided

that it will be done based on component impact on safety.

• Safety standards for automotive components in the market, has also been enforced in stages, to protect safety of consumers. • Trade Description Act 2011, provide legal authority to the Ministry

of Domestic Trade, Cooperative and Consumerism to issue an order for an item required to be certified or marked, as a guarantee of the manufacturing description.

Automotive Components Trade Description Order (2012)

Trade Description Order

Gazetted Enforced Prudent enforcement

Full enforcement

Pneumatic tyre marking 2012

1 Mac 2012 1 Sep 2012 By 31 Dec 2012 1 Jan 2013

Motorcycle helmet marking 2012

Automotive Components Trade Description Order (2013)

• Regulations: • UN R13, R13-H, R90

• MS1164

Trade Description Order

Gazetted Enforced Prudent enforcement

Full enforcement

Brake Marking 2013 1 June 2013 1 June 2014

2014 Implementation Plan

• Trade Description Order to be enforced in 2014 including:

• Vehicle lamps

• Windscreen

Lamps Regulation Windscreen Regulations

1. UN R112, R113, R37, R99

2. MS 1914: 2006, MS1776: 2004 (Confirmed:2011), MS/IEC 60809: 2008

1. UN R43 – Safety Glazing Material

2. MS 595

Conclusions

• The country is going through rapid development, and so does the mobility needs

• Motorcycles have become a very important element in the traffic system. Innovative & creative ways to address their presence vitally needed.

• Numerous researches, initiatives and interventions were, have been and will be planned and implemented to ensure sustainable safety and growth are achieved.

117

New challenges

• Entry of electric motorcycle in the traffic,

volume around 400 units [2012 registration record], potential risk due to low noise/sound emission, need further study

• Regulatory compliance to MS 2413:2011 Electric Motorcycles Specifications

Thank You

119